> Daniel's comment below that the B and I elements are not removed in the
> HTML 4.0 strict dtd is important. I didn't realize this. But it means
> if this point is kept in the WAI guideline it is at odds with the
> HTML 4.0 guideline.
You really mean "WAI HTML guideline is at odds with the HTML spec".
I don't know the exact reason why B, I, TT, BIG and SMALL are still in
HTML4 strict.dtd while a bunch of others presentational attributes
have been deprecated (probably they were more widely used).
But one thing to realize is that strict dtd compliance and
accessibility guidelines cannot be readily related, without being
completely orthogonal either.
For instance, there are things deprecated in the strict DTD (like
ISINDEX, MENU, or some use of TYPE, or LANGUAGE as attributes) that,
if used, would not change the accessibility of a page.
Anyway, I want to go back to the Required status of the use of Markup
vs. CSS for presentation.
I think we need a finer granularity.
Right now, the guideline (1.1) says that not using <B>, <I>, etc as
well as <CENTER>, or BORDER or ALIGN attribute is Required.
How doing this makes it "impossible for one or more groups of users to
understand the page" ?
It should be Recommended.
Under the same section (1.1), we mention things like
converting text to images
alternative text file formats (such as PDF)
using proprietary extensions
Which are really of a different order or evilness.
Later on we talk about misusing markup, like BLOCKQUOTE for indent, H#
for big font, wrong nesting of headers, etc, which are of the same
vein, and also much worse than using <B>, or <CENTER> (or using <HR>
for that matters).
I think we need to revise Section 1 and 5 to make them more realistic
and accurate, and maybe converge them into one "Text and Style"
section.